Trust Equation


The Trust Equation uses four objective variables to measure trustworthiness. These four variables are best described as: Credibility, Reliability, Intimacy and Self-Orientation.

We combine these variables into the following equation:

TQ stands for Trust Quotient. The Trust Quotient is a number — like your IQ or EQ — that benchmarks your trustworthiness against the four variables.

Let’s dig into each variable a bit more:

  • CREDIBILITY has to do with the words we speak. In a sentence, we might say, “I can trust what she says about intellectual property; she’s very credible on the subject.”
  • RELIABILITY has to do with actions. We might say, “If he says he’ll deliver the product tomorrow, I trust him, because he’s dependable.”
  • INTIMACY refers to the safety or security that we feel when entrusting someone with something. We might say, “I can trust her with that information; she’s never violated my confidentiality before, and she would never embarrass me.”
  • SELF-ORIENTATION refers to the person’s focus. In particular, whether the person’s focus is primarily on him or herself, or on the other person. We might say, “I can’t trust him on this deal — I don’t think he cares enough about me, he’s focused on what he gets out of it.” Or more commonly, “I don’t trust him — I think he’s too concerned about how he’s appearing, so he’s not really paying attention.”

Trust Equation Read More »

ideal team player


#Teamwork has always been important. 𝗝𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝗮𝘀 𝘁𝗲𝗮𝗺𝘀 𝘂𝘀𝗲𝗱 𝘁𝗼 𝘀𝗵𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝗮𝗺𝗲 𝗽𝗵𝘆𝘀𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗹 𝘀𝗽𝗮𝗰𝗲, 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗶𝘀 𝗻𝗼 𝗹𝗼𝗻𝗴𝗲𝗿 𝗮 𝗻𝗲𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗮𝗿𝘆 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗱𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻. Teams have become remote and hybrid. And this more than ever accentuates the need to create cohesive teams capable of withstanding zoom meetings, time differences, asynchronous communication and lack of coffee breaks.

There are many definitions of the characteristics of highly effective teams. I like the one by Patrick Lencioni, author of “The ideal team player”.

According to him, 𝐬𝐮𝐜𝐜𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐟𝐮𝐥 𝐭𝐞𝐚𝐦𝐬 𝐞𝐱𝐡𝐢𝐛𝐢𝐭 𝟓 𝐤𝐞𝐲 𝐛𝐞𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐢𝐨𝐫𝐬:

👉𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘆 𝗯𝘂𝗶𝗹𝗱 𝘁𝗿𝘂𝘀𝘁
👉𝗺𝗮𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗳𝗹𝗶𝗰𝘁
👉𝗺𝗲𝗺𝗯𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗺𝗶𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗱
👉𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘆 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗮𝗰𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗻𝘁𝗮𝗯𝗹𝗲
👉𝗳𝗼𝗰𝘂𝘀 𝗼𝗻 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘂𝗹𝘁𝘀

these behaviors are almost the 𝗯𝘆𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗱𝘂𝗰𝘁 𝗼𝗳 𝟯 𝘃𝗶𝗿𝘁𝘂𝗲𝘀 that the team acquires:

🏆𝗛𝗨𝗠𝗜𝗟𝗜𝗧𝗬 (focus on the “we”)
🏆𝗛𝗨𝗡𝗚𝗘𝗥 (learning and contribution mentality)
🏆𝗦𝗠𝗔𝗥𝗧 (in the sense of emotional intelligence)

The Sketchnote illustrates well that all 3 qualities are necessary and how it affects the team 𝘄𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝗼𝗻𝗲 𝗼𝗿 𝘁𝘄𝗼 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗺𝗶𝘀𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗴:

👎𝗢𝗡𝗟𝗬 𝗛𝗨𝗠𝗕𝗟𝗘: Pawn, No power of influence or persuasion
👎𝗢𝗡𝗟𝗬 𝗛𝗨𝗡𝗚𝗘𝗥: “Bulldozer” inconsiderate to others. “Pushy” for results
👎𝗢𝗡𝗟𝗬 𝗦𝗠𝗔𝗥𝗧: “Charmer” , not real contributor

The model raises some questions:

✔ How to interview in a way that candidates can demonstrate these qualities?

🔎𝗔𝘀𝘀𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗱𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗹𝗼𝗽𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗳𝗳:
✔How can the #leadership identify gaps?
✔ How can you support your team developing the missing virtues?

🏛️𝗜𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗴𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘃𝗶𝗿𝘁𝘂𝗲𝘀 𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗼 𝘁𝗵𝗲 #𝗰𝘂𝗹𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲:
✔How can you establish role models for these behaviors?
✔ How can you share and communicate behavioral expectations to your team according to this model?
✔ How can you implement a system to address violations?

📌 The 𝘀𝗶𝗱𝗲 𝗲𝗳𝗳𝗲𝗰𝘁 is that if you have a critical majority of members behaving according to the 3 virtues, the others will necessarily have to adapt or become isolated from the rest or even drop out.

📌It seems to me that the practice of these behaviors, although being a choice, is greatly facilitated in environments of #psychologicalsafety. One more reason to promote it.

𝗛𝗼𝘄 𝗱𝗼 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗸 𝗮 𝘀𝘂𝗰𝗰𝗲𝘀𝗳𝘂𝗹 𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗺𝗼𝗱𝗲𝗹 𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗹𝗱 𝗹𝗼𝗼𝗸 𝗹𝗶𝗸𝗲?

Acknowledgment: Patrick Lencioni.
Sketchnote: Maria Luisa Engels
👉 Follow me for weekly Sketchnotes

I Read More »

Are you in a Relation-based or performance-Based Organization?

As a Professional Manager, you would know how to navigate through the priorities and expectations of your stakeholders. In this article, we will explore why it is important to know if you are in a Relation-based or performance-Based Organization; and how that might affect your relations with stakeholders and performance in the team!

Why is it important to know the difference between a Relation-based or performance-Based Organization?

As a manager that has worked in both a Relation-based and performance-Based Organization, a Professional Manager understands that the business mission priorities and core values change dramatically! In addition, the reward and recognition system for team evaluation will differ significantly, when you work in an organization that doesn’t value performance over relations…

What is the difference between a Relation-based or performance-Based Organization?

A relation-based organization and a performance-based organization are two different approaches to how an organization operates and manages its employees.

In a relation-based organization, the focus is on building strong relationships between the employer and employees, and between employees themselves. This approach emphasizes trust, loyalty, and communication. Such organizations tend to have a more relaxed work environment and may make decisions based on employee satisfaction and happiness.

In a performance-based organization, the focus is on achieving specific performance objectives and outcomes. This approach emphasizes clear goals and targets, performance metrics, and accountability. Such organizations tend to have a more formal work environment and may make decisions based on data and results.

It’s worth noting that many organizations incorporate aspects of both models, depending on the business and the context. It is not necessarily better or worse to be relation-based or performance-based, it’s about finding the balance that works for your organization and context.

Be a Mid-performer with High-Trust Team Member

Although many organizations claim that they value both equally, watch this interesting video from Simon Sinek to learn why it is better to be Mid-performer with Hight-trust in any organization.

Simon Sinek on Performance and Trust

Here is what Simon has to say: I’ve worked with the Navy SEALs and I asked them “how do you pick the guys that go in SEAL Team 6?” Because they’re the best of the best of the best! They drew a graph for me and on one side the word performance and on the other side they wrote the word trust!

The way they define the terms is performance on the battlefield and performance off the battlefield. So, Performance is your skills, this is what makes your quarterly earnings, whatever you translate into the right performance in its traditional sense!

Trust is how are you off the battlefield. What kind of person are you? The way they put it is “I’m going to trust you with my life but do I trust you with my money and my wife?”

This is what they told me, nobody wants this person: The low performer & low trust, of course!

Of course, everybody wants this person a high performer of high trust!

But, what they learned is that the high performer of low trust is a toxic leader and a toxic team member and people would rather have a medium performer of high trust; sometimes even a low performer of high trust!

The problem in business is that we have lopsided metrics, we have a million-in-one metrics to measure someone’s performance and negligible to no metrics to measure someone’s trustworthiness!

So what we end up doing is promoting or bonusing toxicity in our businesses which is bad for the long game, because it eventually destroys the whole organization and its “Quality Culture!”

The irony is it’s unbelievably easy to find High-performers with Low-Trust, people go to any team and say who’s the A**hole and they’ll all point to the same person. Equally, if you go to any team and say, who do you trust more than anybody else who’s always got your back when the chips are down they will be there with you; they will also all point to the same person: the mid-performer with high-trustworthiness!

It’s the best gifted natural leader who’s getting who’s creating an environment for everybody else to succeed and they may not be your most individual highest performer but that person you better keep on your team.

Clifton Strength to identify your VIP team players!

Using a Clifton Strength or other similar psychological evaluation and assessments help your organization identify the diversity available in your team. Being inclusive to leverage all the strengths and empowering them in the right position is a key strength of a Professional Manager.

As part of the Professional Manager training, managers should understand, respect, and learn how to manage and develop their team for success. Navigating through the Tuckerman Ladder would be much easier and faster, with the help of these evaluations!

Professional managers trust

Are you in a Relation-based or performance-Based Organization? Read More »

Scroll to Top